These are actually the same people that have been in office. The new people don't take office until January.

The assertion that Americans are united in any way - being "fed up with Washington" - is stupid in the most literal sense of the word. Sure, Americans generally share a feeling of wanting this issue resolved, but probably a third are "fed up" that Washington hasn't done what one side wants and another third are "fed up" that Washington hasn't done what the other side wants. The third that are "fed up" that Washington hasn't reached a compromise are outnumbered by the two thirds who despite their claims actually don't want compromise, but rather want their preference to prevail.

Lets impose "Term Limits"

Kick all the bums out of Washington. they like to stay in office for a lifetime and their approval rating is near 5%?

Why let them remain in office for a lifetime when their performance is so poor?

and no.... elections do not equal term limits! The same two parties keep running the same old names (there are really no choices in elections.

Theres an awful lot of personal wealth created by being a career politician. Just ask Mitch McConnell and Harry Reid. I am sure these guys are looking out for our best interest.

Re: 1.3 - Yeah, let's get more inexperienced lawmakers into Washington - that'll fix everything!

Yes these are the existing people who have been in office but nothing will change with the new year. If you voted for even one incumbent back into office, then you have no one to blame but yourself when nothing gets done. You had a chance like I did to throw the incumbents from your district out. I chose to do so from the President to the local county clerk. It will continue to be "business as usual" until everyone votes these clowns out of office. Only then will Washington start working for us again.

It is all Politicians who are acting like they have no clue. We stand waiting for them to stop acting like children and we could have already come to a compromise.

I didn't vote Democrat because all they want to do is destroy, we do need to fire them all, stop all pay for the rest of their lives and get people in there who love America and can work together.

They say lets cut spending, Well Congress is the place to start, Starting with their pay and working our way down to their Health Care, Why do We pay people that don't work?, in the private sector you don't work you don't eat it's that simple, We need accountability in our government!!!!!!!!!

WaltUU @ #1.2 spot on.. I consider myself to be in the outnumbered third of the equation, as I'm not Republican or Democrat.

Maybe inexperience is what we need? We give them a few years to get their sh*t together then we kick em all out and start over. Until the politicians figure out it's our way or the highway, we just keep doing it. Seems to me all this "experience" has gotten us nothing but a bunch of money grubbin, forgot why I was sent here, all about them them them, and screw the people who got them there.

Ha Ha...There is no major turnover in Washington. The same idiots that were there before will be there in January. How about the performance of these "experienced" lawmakers? "Inexperienced" ones surely couldn't do any better.

All the idiots you voted for are stupid. All the idiots I voted for are brilliant.

They created this fiscal cliff. They created this drama and last minute dealing. You get what you deserve.

I know...Lets blame the Tea Party, even though they don't have enough members to stop anything from passing...But, we like the slogan of blaming the Tea Party.

Wait...Wait...Someone accuse me of watching Fox News!!!!

These moron's are going to tank my market shares and I'm going to be pissed.

I dream of one day having a tripartisan electorate, where one party can't strong arm at the expense of the American people because there's a liberal "black fella" sitting potus. I'm so sick of this song and dance already I could just about throw up.

The American neanderthal populous has showed you where their concern lies when they rushed out to buy AR15's after the potential threat of that assault weapon being taken off the market thickened the air.

Tennis court oath anyone?

All members of Senate and House -plus all supporting staff of any kind--WILL NOT BE PAID THEIR BI-WEEKLY SALARY --starting on the 1st of jan. 2013 and FORWARD!!--NO SALARY at ALL!!!!!! No draws--No advance pay--All previously passed Bills that benefit--their state--of any kind-will STOP!! All monies forwarding (funds) to said state -- IF ALL MEMBERS CAN NOT AGREE (meaning a major to pass) on any future bill--then said member(s) and his/her supporting staff--SHALL refuse any and all salaries/payments to benefit their--PERSONAL--SELF-FAMILY--THEY HAVE THE OPTION TO RESIGN--and go back to public life--to earn a living!!!!!!!!

Paws, Your last comment shows you are smarter than I thought!

One party voters should be picked up and thrown into the ocean.

Dr. Ruth Westheimer‏@AskDrRuth

Members of Congress who can't compromise probably aren't good lovers. Sex requires give and take.

I didn't need Dr. Ruth to tell me that. It is pretty obvious. One party voters define this better than anyone.

I vote for the cliff!!!

No MORE MONEY PRINTING!!!!!!!!!!

If ANY of us delivered this sad level of 'performance' to ANY employer - we would be out. No separation package. No parachute. No pension. Just an abundance of adieu.

So why are these asses still drawing a salary paid by you and me?

Roy,

That is exactly not what he has said. How can you keep making up these lies!

Nothing is so firmly believed as that which is least known! You sure prove those words!

No. What we need is some way of punishing people who think that losing an election gives them the right to dictate the policies of the nation, obstructing government doing the people's work if they don't get their own selfish way.

To be clear, I was a Republican

This made me sad. @1.2 you said what I was thinking, but then you just did a 360, blaming Republicans, and nothing I said in any way should've created your "answer" You're basically saying we shouldn't get rid of the old and put in new, unless they're Democrats right?

For the record only 2 of the people I voted for this last election actually got in, and they're both affiliated with my state elections, actually technically one is a county thing. Our new district attorney, and Ted Cruz, as far as everyone else who got in, I got stuck being "the outnumbered third of the equation"

I live in a red state, the one people love to hate, but I get the utmost satisfaction out of those who say red states take more than blue states, knowing damn well they can't use my state as an example.

So I will stick with the out with the old and in with the new EVERY election until the politicians figure out that their job is to do what we the people tell them to, not what they want to do.

I know...Lets blame the Tea Party, even though they don't have enough members to stop anything from passing...But, we like the slogan of blaming the Tea Party.

Right? I've always found this amusing. (no I'm not tea party) they're insignificant yet it's all their fault, I still haven't figured out exactly how that works.

clwyd - I have to disagree. The democrats plan to put everyone in their own home and the packaging of the failed mortgages due to this got us into this mess. As the housiong market goes, so goes the country. The worst President we ever had is currently in office and we are stuck with him for the next four years.

Paws93

BTW - This is all George Bush's fault.

I'm lmao @ all the people who don't realize you're being facetious

Hendy,

And the greedy bankers have nothing to do with Mortgages and housing. Especially, when they bet against bad loans to make a profit sot feed their greed? the president is the Executive Branch to make sure that things pass by the Legislative Branch are followed. This year bonehead has done little or nothing and the result is a 50% drop in legislation from the House!

Obama...LOL...

So the dems hail Clinton as the last president to balance the budget (smoke and mirrors along with the dot.com boom), but they don't want to go back to his tax status? Morons. Obama is so fixated on tax the rich, he refuses to compromise and Harry Reid is such a horse's @ss, he would watch Obama eat a baby and find a way to spin it as a wonderful thing. Obama is a community organizer and a lousy leader. He only wants the job to party, he doesn't want to mess with the grind of actually running the country. Way to go voters who thought they would get freebies by voting for him.

"Everyone knows that Democrats were reported to have been busing in people in by the thousands to vote without photo I.D. in swing states, particularly in Ohio who were somehow allowed to vote, even without photo I.D., or even the ability to speak English"

No everyone doesn't know that. Only losers that can't face the fact that they lost and have their tin foil hats on too tight think that.

PS I heard it was Mitt shipping in Repubs without ID's. See how easy it is to make up BS?

WaltUU.... Please do yourself a favor and get off the Kool Aid.

Stop projecting.

Try thinking for yourself.

Back at ya.

Break from the shackles brother.....

Grow some consideration for others, friend.

@1.2 you said what I was thinking, but then you just did a 360

False. My comments are completely consistent with each other. You just didn't like the fact that the comment you didn't like followed from the comment you did like, when you've been taught to feel negatively about the comment you didn't like by folks who seek to rationalize self-centered greed and egoistic religious reactionaryism.

You're basically saying we shouldn't get rid of the old and put in new, unless they're Democrats right?

Nope: I'm saying we shouldn't blindly make stupid moves like putting any trash candidates into office, just because they're "new". That's pretty-much how we got into the mess we're in, since we did so much of that in 2010. I actually would be fine with a Congress full of Republicans and Republican President - true Republicans - Goldwater Republicans - not these self-centered, greed-mongering cretins and their reactionary religious wacko cohorts.

"What we need is some way of punishing people who think that losing an election gives them the right to dictate the policies of the nation"

Perhaps you should consider that the Republicans WON the House, winning 54% of the seats on the promise of fiscal restraint, while Obama only won 51% of the votes.

BOTH sides need to COMPROMISE, and that means the Republicans need to offer tax revenues, and Obama needs to offer spending cuts.

The Republicans are offering tax increases on the 'rich', but Obama not only asks for bigger tax increases, he refuses to offer ANY spending cuts - in fact, he want to spend even more.

They should all be fined a $1,000 a day for non-performance. Let this hit their wallet hard.......

@WaltUU

Read what An American In China has to say before you start pointing fingers at any one party.

The assertion that Americans are united in any way - being "fed up with Washington" - is stupid in the most literal sense of the word. Sure, Americans generally share a feeling of wanting this issue resolved, but probably a third are "fed up" that Washington hasn't done what one side wants and another third are "fed up" that Washington hasn't done what the other side wants. The third that are "fed up" that Washington hasn't reached a compromise are outnumbered by the two thirds who despite their claims actually don't want compromise, but rather want their preference to prevail.

I disagree, less than 5% are fed up. Fed up people vote third party. How did you vote? To the rest of you that don't vote third party, it's your fault that we are in this mess. Remember it's a government by the the people.

The us goverment is a day care center for the rich .Yes i said day Carecenter. 99% of the members of congress (On both sides of the isle) congress are Millionairs.That is not a fact the is disputable.What is though is the face the congress wants the Rich to pay lesds while we the working class pay more.People are loosing jobs,homes and the country burns while they play their political games.What congress forgets is that they WORK for US the people of this country .NOT for their own agendas.Until this is a mindset that changes in congress we the real 99 % will be held hostage

"If we had a leader in the white house instead of a community organizer this would have been solved long before the election."

How do you figure? He isn't King you know he doesn't really have much to say about it other than veto power.

So Please tell us all what you think a real leader would do?

Across the country, people are shaking their heads about negotiations that go nowhere and fingers that point everywhere while the nation hurtles toward the precipice of a new economic crisis.

Well, Americans, can we remember this come November? Can we pay attention to the positions and voting records of our representatives in Congress and vote out the people who are standing in the way of the negotiations?

Why re-elect these do-nothings??? Boehner and Cantor should go. If they have an ounce of patriotism, they should not run for re-election when their current terms end. We need fresh blood in Washington, legislators who are there to serve the people rather than to serve themselves.

Pay attention, Americans! Use your power to elect representatives who will work FOR us rather than against us. Otherwise, we have only ourselves to blame for this continuing stalemate.

Perhaps #1.44 should consider that Republicans lost seats in the House. People are getting fed up with the self-centered greed-mongering that the GOP represents. And you want to get out the yardstick, the Democrats have 55% of the seats in the US Senate, and gained seats there. If you're going to use such puerile means of determining what's right, then "Two out of three - Democrats win".

Both sides do need to compromise. The Democrats cannot expect to get what they want, a return to the tax rates of the Clinton era, with the tax rate on income over $250,000 being 39.6%. They do have to compromise on that, perhaps settling on that tax rate for income over $400,000 and having a lower tax rate, perhaps 35%, on income between $250,000 and $400,000. And even though the Democrats would be happy to see Capital Gains tax rates return to what they were during the Clinton era, i.e., up to 29.19%, they'll have to compromise on that number, perhaps setting that rate at 25% instead.

So yes, both sides do need to compromise. The fact is that the Democrats have already made it clear that they are willing to compromise on each of these issue, while many self-centered greed-mongers in the Republican Party are acting like children insisting that compromise doesn't apply to them - that they get to dictate to everyone that marginal tax rates won't go up. That's not compromise. That's a two-year old's temper tantrum.

Oh, and apparently, you haven't been paying attention to the news: President Obama has proposed over $1 TRILLION in spending cuts, and put another $1 TRILLION of spending cuts on the table, if the GOP stops acting like children and start compromising.

WaltUU

you are the only one beating your chest and stamping your feet. Your on a tangent.

Now, if i have to elect someone new until we get the right person I will do that....what you are saying is, you have a bad employee but you refuse to seek a new one, so you will just keep the bad one until one day he decides to be better?? yeah right, hows that working for you?

oh and im going to put you on ignore so that I can actually read the good posts...your posts, are shoving down our throats, your agenda...makes people sick

I disagree, less than 5% are fed up. Fed up people vote third party. How did you vote? To the rest of you that don't vote third party, it's your fault that we are in this mess. Remember it's a government by the the people.

I see your logic there, but also see through it: Voting third party is actually not exculpatory, but rather is a cop-out. We actually are all in this together, and we all share equal blame, Republican voters, Democrat voters, third-party voters, and non-voters. Specifically, from my perspective, the fault the Democrats are responsible for is so far being ineffective at convincing enough voters to realize the morally offensive nature of GOP perspective.

Well, Americans, can we remember this come November?

That doesn't serve the interests of those who advocate for self-serving interests, and I don't just mean economics. Just look at the gun control issue - the gun fetishists are doing all they can now to "run out the clock" so that the vast herd of sheep that is the American electorate forgets the horror they experienced when learning about the tragedy in Newtown CT. That's the way politics is run in this country today - if you support something offensive, just obstruct, delay, filibuster - and eventually the pressure to make things better subsides.

"BTW - This is all George Bush's fault."

No, it's John F. Kennedy's fault. He's the one that approved allowing public employees to unionize - thus allowing them to collect $Billions in 'contributions' from taxpayers that the unions use to elect Democratic politicians who will roll over in their 'negotiations' with the unions. Even FDR opposed allowing public employees to unionize because of the inherent 'conflict of interest'.

Federal civilian employees get more than double the pay and benefits of equivalent private sector employees, and a big part of why we have such huge Deficits. Here's a link to the study that shows that the AVERAGE Federal civilian worker (which includes clerks and secretaries) gets compensation of over $123,000 per year compared with only $61,000 for comparable private sector employees - Isn't it nice that Federal workers get to retire with virtually full (bloated) pay at age 55, while those in the private sector who pay the cost have to wait until age 67 to collect about 30% of their pay from Social Security after retiring;

http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/income/2010-08-10-1Afedpay10_ST_N.htm

you are the only one beating your chest and stamping your feet. Your on a tangent.

Stop projecting. I'm holding up a mirror to self-centered greed-mongering. That's pisses some people off. They need to get over it, grow up, and start caring about people other than just themselves.

Now, if i have to elect someone new until we get the right person I will do that....what you are saying is, you have a bad employee but you refuse to seek a new one, so you will just keep the bad one until one day he decides to be better?? yeah right, hows that working for you?

That's not what I said. The fact that you couldn't come up with even a single rational argument to rebut what I actually wrote, and was so desperate to respond that you actually had to make some nonsense up for me to have said, just so you had something easy to argue against, shows that even you know how weak your perspective is.

Here's a clue for free: If you cannot refute what someone else writes, as they wrote it, say nothing - don't think it serves you well to make up nonsense to argue against.

roy i thought you moved to costa rica.why dont you worry about who is elected there and let us americans worry about america.president obamas position is a sound one.he wants the upper 2 percent to pay 3 percent more income tax.hardly crippling.and he doesnt want cuts to social security or medicare.if the republicans insist on cuts let them propose cuts to defence.we will be fine with a military half the size we have now

Hendy329 1.27

it was a joke...calm

clw - Thanks for agreeing with me on the mortgage issue. Yes it was greed on wall street that put these packages togehter and even more greed for those who purchased them. They lost that bet. Had we not had the philosophy that everyone deserves a home, whether they can afford it or not, that would not have happened.

1SGFitzsWife4ID 1.35

sweet comment! seems like (by your words) your part of the new generations getting involved in what our country is doing, could be wrong...sorry if I am, but just glad you take a direct birds eye view of the whole instead of looking at it sideways from one side or the other...glad to see we are out there, trying

Samsworld53

The us government is a day care center for the rich

wow, you actually summed up our entire government in a few words, well done.

Four years of complaining that the Bush tax cuts caused all our fiscal problems, and now liberals only want them to expire for those that have been more successful then themselves. Raising 86 billion on the backs of the successful and eliminating all the spending cuts associated with going off the cliff solves nothing. Yet liberals are all about perception, they think this is a solution because Obama says so. That is all it takes, and the country will continue down the path toward oblivion. Obama is looking more and more like a socialist everyday, with his liberal minions cheering him on. Real solutions to this nations fiscal crisis requires everyone to sacrifice, and liberals have no interest.

Interesting facts regarding the Federal civilian workforce;

"African Americans make up 17.4 percent of the federal workforce, as compared to 10.1 percent of the civilian labor force." That's a 72% over-representation of African Americans - Affirmative Action at work. And yet they seek even more minorities for those overpaid federal jobs - WHY? because they overwhelmingly vote Democratic.

Source - http://govcentral.monster.com/benefits/articles/387-federal-workforce-diversity-why-agencies-seek-out-minority-workers

Let the Bush-era tax cuts expire, all temp tax cuts, and mandated spending cuts to commence. Let all the freeloaders scurry for cover in search of the bowls of free gravy. You democrat groupies with several hundred word postings about the Tea Party, but never indicate an awareness that we have real problems that Obama and his unqualified minions refuse to acknowledge. You people are pathetic.

Wasn't it John Boehner that said the Republicans made a pledge to veto anything that President Obama wanted to get passed. It seems that the president is for the middle class while rich Republicans like John Boehner don't want to tax the rich. We as Americans have to think hard when re-electing delicates to congress. John Boehner should not be re-elected. He does not have the middle class at heart. His only concern is for his own pocket.

WaltUU so funny just so funny...I didn't say one thing bad about you...yet you went right on ahead with showing just how badly you want to force something down any ones throat....its quite amazing, but nothing but rubbish.

projecting...lol that is not a projection...all i did is count how many times you repeated the same comment and called it a tangent

There is no argument because I do not take stand with anything about your post...no reason to argue with you, just sick of seeing your rant...thats all. hardly even read your words, they just sounded like a rant from the get go...called you out to calm down

johnQcitizen "roy i thought you moved to costa rica.why dont you worry about who is elected there and let us americans worry about america.president obamas position is a sound one.he wants the upper 2 percent to pay 3 percent more income tax.hardly crippling.and he doesnt want cuts to social security or medicare.if the republicans insist on cuts let them propose cuts to defence.we will be fine with a military half the size we have now"

I'll be moving next month, but I will remain an American citizen, so I still get to express an opinion - and I will still have the Internet - Sorry to disappoint you.

By the way - The Obama's tax INCREASE on the 'rich' is actually over 13%. 4.6% divided by 35% is an increase of 13.1%.

I agree we could cut Defense spending - in fact, I think the 'sequester' cuts to both Defense and other 'discretionary' spending should take effect.

As for Social Security and Medicare, I have no problem with maintaining these programs, but WE NEED TO PAY FOR THEM if we want to keep them 'as is'. The next post explains what I mean.

I have just researched the problem with health care entitlements, and it is far worse than most people imagine. I used the President's own Budget (OMB) for 2013 as the basis for the basic nformation, and here are the results;

The projected Revenues for Medicare/Medicaid over the next 10 years are $2.823 Trillion.

The projected Costs for Medicare/Medicaid/Obamacare over the next 10 years are $11.134 Trillion.

That leaves a net Deficit in the Medicare/Medicaid/Obamacare programs of $8.311 Trillion, which is even greater than the total projected Federal Deficits of $6.684 Trillion over the next 10 years. In other words, if we did not have a Deficit from health care, we would have a budget SURPLUS of more than $1.6 Trillion over the next 10 years.

Obviously, something needs to be done with this HUGE 'entitlement problem', but Obama has conveniently ignored the problem in his Budget projections, and will demonize any Republicans that try to address the problem (Rep. Ryan).

It's a shame that the media does not give us the information that we need to make intelligent choices. Here's the link to Obama's Budget to verify - See Table S-5

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2013/assets/tables.pdf

My recommendation – Fully fund Medicare with increased payroll taxes of about $75 per month each for employers & employees, and for Medicaid, a combination of a small deductible ($10 per doctor visit) for Medicaid beneficiaries plus a National Sales Tax of about 3% (excluding food and medicine). These simple changes would fully fund these programs and lead to a Surplus instead of huge Deficits within 10 years.

I welcome any comments.

I see your logic there, but also see through it: Voting third party is actually not exculpatory, but rather is a cop-out. We actually are all in this together, and we all share equal blame, Republican voters, Democrat voters, third-party voters, and non-voters. Specifically, from my perspective, the fault the Democrats are responsible for is so far being ineffective at convincing enough voters to realize the morally offensive nature of GOP perspective.

LOL! Still toting the Republicrat party line. I guess you're not fed up yet.

Obama definitions:

1) Compromise: You are going to let me punish the job creators in this country or I will punish everybody.

2) Fair Share: In Socialism it is required that wealth is redistributed so I am going to bend the wealthy over the counter and give that money to moochers and leeches (as long as they vote for me).

3) Constitution: Just a piece of paper that if ripped in small strips of paper double very well as toilet tissue

4) Benghazi: Next question.

5) Taxpayer: Income necessary for me to play golf and take my family on lavish trips

6) Lead from Behind: My motto

7) It's all George Bush's fault: My motto

8) Enemy: Republicans (Not Korea, Iran, or Russia like you might think)

9) ObamaCare: The best way to control the people is to have control of their healthcare

10) Bill of Rights: Pesky rules that give the people rights that hinder my total control of the people.

Well, you talk about the tea party, I suppose I could be called a 'Tea Party Democrat', I believe taxation without representation is tyranny, and we are getting taxed to excess, with no representation. I believe in a hand up, but not a hand out, that was the old principles of the Democratic Party, somehow we have lost our way. The budget originates in the house, that has been done, the guy I can't vote out of office is holding it up, Harry Reid. Bring it to the floor of the Senate, approve, amend, or reject it, then send it back to the house, do a reconciliation, and be done with it. Harry Reid is playing partisan politics, simple as that, if he can't get his way, he stands in the way. Harry Reid is the one man party of NO!

Probusiness.

"Nothing is so firmly believed as that which is least known!"

These "children" (immature slugs) just love playing this game of deciding down to the wire what OUR LIVES will be like. Their lives are set in stone, they have no future worries. Not one worth beans. All have agendas (motives) to keep the American people down. Give us too much freedom and we may just replace what we have in Washington.

Hendy,

Thanks for your nice post. ( I sometimes get carried away!) Yes, I agree with most of it. I think that it was the banks who tried to get people their mortgages and homes knowing they could profit the most! Not so much government!

WaltUU

That's the way politics is run in this country today - if you support something offensive, just obstruct, delay, filibuster - and eventually the pressure to make things better subsides.

So I guess Harry Reid thinks an actual budget is offensive, huh?

Andy Blockwood.

Taxed to excess? We are being taxed at the lowest rate since the 60's you fool! It is called "GREED" my friend! $10,000,000,000,000 lost revenue over 12 years due to bush's tax cuts! $4,000,000,000,000 lost for two illegal wars and the lose of 7,200 wasted American lives. let's see. 10 +4 is $14. Our deficit is $16 trillion. Who should we blame?

clwd, Obama extended those tax cuts after campaigning on letting them expire back in 2008. Oops.

And when is the left ever going to remember that a whole lot of democrats VOTED for those "illegal" wars? You know, dems like Biden, Reid, Hillary Clinton, Kerry, et al? They voted for those wars and the costs that went with them.

Pro Business,

I agree with your sense that this should be a nation built on personal responsibility, however your points are egregious distortions of the truth and you know it I think. We come here to argue and it seems like the only way to get a point across is to take it to it's extreme.

I would vote Obama in for a third term if I could. This will always be a country based on laissez faire capitalism, and though I don't care for them the guns will remain as well. The repub's have made themselves out to be the enemy because quite simply they are. They are your enemy as well as mine. Never has bipartisan politics been so uncompromising in the history of this nation than what Obama has had to deal with. Just because he wants to "socialize" health care like every progressive nation, doesn't make him Fidel Castro. Lol, Benghazi, don't make me laugh.

The republican party is 20 years, maybe less away from complete collapse. Quote me on that. Their trickle down economic policies are a joke and they are becoming less and less appealing to the average American.

You wanna talk about how to resolve some of this debt mess? Tax the churches for starters...

Try to put yourself in this scenario: Your household income is is less than your monthly bills - mortgage, groceries, car and insurance bills, all other type of bills. To get yourself out of this bind you decide to spend more and save less.

Does that scenario seem like it would be a feasible solution to getting a household out of debt? No. It is the same for our country. If we have a debt problem the solution is not to spend more, it is to spend less, save more and work towards a balance. As a middle class citizen I believe this country should tax everyone equally. There should be no tax cuts for anyone except maybe those that make less than $100 thousand a year, we should drastically cut back entitlement spending and change tax code to a more aggressive approach to controlling big business' that outsource jobs or try to hide profits in off shore accounts thus preventing paying taxes on those profits.

On a closing note, if we are all fed up with this Governments ineffectiveness and squabbling over who is to blame than we should all ask ourselves and each other, republican and democrat, conservative and liberal, What are WE going to do about it?

Jax A,

Yes, voted for two illegal wars based on lies about Weapons of Mass Destruction that weren't there thanks to bush!! I laugh when the right gets upset about Bengazi and what they call cover-ups. Lies and the loss of 7,200 lives is tragic just like the loss of 4 lives, but far greater and republicans don't seem to care to pursue the republican lies on WMD!

@ROY WILSON-336103

Its true about African American misrepresentation in government employment stats, its also true that they are misrepresented in the military, especially combat arms, where they are over 20%, maybe their 17% representation in government employment is due to their "veteran preference".

I think it is time we realize that our Constitution written 231 years ago needs more than Amendments to make it work. We need to start over! Republican are proving that point right now!

clwyd-2621393 "Nothing is so firmly believed as that which is least known!"

I suppose that could apply to YOU as well. People can post FACTS or OPINIONS.
Facts should be indisputable and from an unbiased source (with links if possible), but opinions are, to be polite - like tongues - everyone has one.

I saw a humorous analogy the other day that I would like to share with you;

"Our debt is about 7 times what we take in. Translate that to your household. Say you NET 50k each year, that would put your credit card debt at 350k. Could you look your spouse in the eye and say "honey we don't have a spending problem"?" Courtesy of BigATC

I LOVE THAT ANALOGY.

The only thing that I would add is her retort, which (imitating Obama) would likely be "I agree that I don't have a spending problem, but we need more income, so get a second job".

Where did you go Walt UU?

Best logic I've seen here in a long time.

Clearest definition of Democratic failure.

Democrats are responsible for... being ineffective at convincing enough voters to realize the morally offensive nature of GOP perspective.

I love your use of the term "vacuous" as it so perfectly describes the posts of Roy Wilson and ProBusiness. As always, vacuous.

status unknown

you say:

I agree with your sense that this should be a nation built on personal responsibility, however your points are egregious distortions of the truth and you know it I think. We come here to argue and it seems like the only way to get a point across is to take it to it's extreme.

..and then you say:

The repub's have made themselves out to be the enemy because quite simply they are. They are your enemy as well as mine.

Instant hypocrisy is always good for a few laughs. Thank for giving me a good chuckle to start out my weekend!

Roy, what about your mortgage? I'll bet there are plenty of people with a high multiplier of debt to income. Doesn't mean squat. It's all about ability to pay. The US government has proven to have the best credit of any nation in the world, as illustrated by the interest rates paid on our Treasury Bonds.

Jax A,

Yes, voted for two illegal wars based on lies about Weapons of Mass Destruction that weren't there thanks to bush!! I laugh when the right gets upset about Bengazi and what they call cover-ups. Lies and the loss of 7,200 lives is tragic just like the loss of 4 lives, but far greater and republicans don't seem to care to pursue the republican lies on WMD!

Tell me, clwd, when Clinton bombed Iraq in 1998 because according to him, Madeline Albright, Sandy Berger and Nancy Pelosi, Iraq had WMDs, who was lying then? You mean, Iraq had WMDs in 1998, but not in 2001 and 2002?

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998.

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998.

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.

So, boys and girls, the moral of the story...when the democrats used WMDs as a reason for Desert Fox in 1998, it was the truth. When they voted with the republicans to go to war just a few years later, it was all a lie.

JaxA,

Do you know what hypocrisy is? ....because there is none in your quotes in 1.84.

@clwyd hmmm i must have been living under a rock ? two illegal wars ? i know of one where Obama invaded Libya without congressional approval. is that what you are talking about ? And i bet it was Bush that facilitated 9/11. I like coffee in the morning i see you like the msnbc kool-aid.

The people who are actually to blame for what is going on in Washington D.C. are the AMERICAN VOTERS, including myself! To paraphrase a famous quote: "We know exactly who to blame and it is OURSELVES!

If indeed this is OUR country, then WE THE PEOPLE are responsible for the mess in the U.S. Congress!

@ProBusiness... the "job creators" have had these great tax breaks for years but wheres all the jobs?? Your nose on your moniker says it all! It just keeps getting bigger and bigger!

JaxA #1.86

OK, but how many Americans were killed in Desert Fox in 1998? How much did it cost?

Eliminate the lobbyist money and watch how quickly issues like this get resolved.

Obama is clearly the one to blame for this mess. Congress is chocked full of moral people who only want to do good things for people.

Roy, what about your mortgage? I'll bet there are plenty of people with a high multiplier of debt to income. Doesn't mean squat. It's all about ability to pay. The US government has proven to have the best credit of any nation in the world, as illustrated by the interest rates paid on our Treasury Bonds.

Doesn't mean squat? You mean the housing fiasco had no lesson for all to learn? Yes, people in droves taking out mortgages that were more than 7 or 8 times what they made in a year sure turned out to be great for our economy!!

So there's no need to worry about government spending, just yet, huh? When should we worry, exactly? When our long term debt outpaces our long term GDP by 150%? 200%? 500%

SmBusOwnerinNY "Roy, what about your mortgage? I'll bet there are plenty of people with a high multiplier of debt to income. Doesn't mean squat. It's all about ability to pay. The US government has proven to have the best credit of any nation in the world, as illustrated by the interest rates paid on our Treasury Bonds."

Agreed, but that's the 'rub', isn't it? When Greece's Debt Ratio got to 120% of National Income (GDP) a few years ago, lenders stopped loaning to them, and the result has been extreme austerity (and riots), with an Unemployment Rate of about 30% today.

For 2012, the estimate is that our Debt Ratio is 107% of GDP, and Obama's 2013 Budget proposal projects it will increase to 119% of GDP in 2016 (his last year).

As for our 'credit', if you check the facts, Obama is financing out Debt increases by having the Feds simply print more money, which is highly inflationary (as any reputable economist will tell you).

In fact, China (our biggest creditor) has REDUCED the amount they have invested in Treasury Debt by about $200 Billion in just the last year (forcing the Feds to print more money to make up the difference). In fact, of the $1.1 Trillion Deficit over the last 12 months, virtually ALL of that came from the Fed's printing press, not from REAL investors.

We are on that slippery slope to insolvency, and Obama refuses to even talk about it.

Gotta go now - 'constructive' things to do, but 'Have a nice day'.

the higher they are in the pecking order the more useless they become. Obama, Reid, Pelspi, & Bohner are all a waste of human flesh. None of them put the country over their own personal interests.

OK, but how many Americans were killed in Desert Fox in 1998? How much did it cost?

Either it's a lie or it isn't. The democrats still believed Saddam had weapons in 2001 and 2002, as did a lot of the world, which is why they voted for it. (I know 1441 is awfully inconvenient) They can't call it a lie retroactively in order to keep blaming Bush because of the costs of the war when they used the very same reasoning to take military action just a few years previous.

Jax, A,

Yes, the Democrats believed the lies fed to them by bush who wanted to go to war to avenge his father being insulted by Saddam. Lies and knowingly fed to the politicians and America! Far worse than Bengazi.

clwd... so Clinton, Pelosi, Berger, and Albright were telling the same lie in 1998? You mean, it wasn't a lie in 1998? Please explain...

David Puddy,

Get in touch with reality man if you think the Congress is full of moral people. They are immoral and greedy! Especially the party of No and the teabuggers who wrap themselves in "God and Country!" Tread on Me is my moot to them!

I don't see and didn't read the facts that they were telling the same lie. You please give me the facts you are talking about in 1998! All I know is the fact came out that bush knew that there weren't WMD in Iraq. He was told they had them in the past, but they had been destroyed. Exactly what we found about during the war.

Everyone wants to blame Congress, however the can got kicked down the road by Obama on this issue several years ago. Obama needs to take the leadership roll in the solution because the budget process begins with his office. Obama still has never submitted a complete budget for Congressional approval. That is one of the reasons we are at this juncture. The White House has created the blame game and then hides in the corner waiting to see who the victor will be. That is not a sensible way to solve the American peoples fiscal issues by any stroke of ones imagination. Even if the American public is sparred going over the cliff, the required Constitutional work of submitting a complete budget for Congressional review still will not have been done by the White House. It is almost as if the White House has no clue of their job description and deadline responsibilities. There in lies the problem. For all you liberals that now have your feathers up, I voted for Obama the first time around. Not the second time though. He did not do his job to earn my vote the second time.

clwyd...we haven't had a budget in how long? And why haven't we? The democrats voted unanimously with the republicans against Barry's last two "budgets" 97-0 and 99-0 respectively, and now Reid won't even allow any kind of budget on to the floor. Reid hasn't allowed more than two dozen republicans jobs bills to the floor either...so, who's the party of "no", exactly?

I guess budgets became optional since Obama's reign.

Michigan Northerner,

Obama never went into Libya to start any war. You must have been under a rock. The two illegal wars were the ones that the Hague in the Netherlands has arrest warrants out on gw bush(THE WORST PRESIDENT EVER) for war crimes. It should include the lies he fed to the Congress to get them to vote for two wars that never should have happened and the Hague calls illegal!

You please give me the facts you are talking about in 1998!

I posted their very quotes for you in 1.86. So, were they lying when they said those things?

Its amusing to read how everyone is sooo fed up with Washington. Could it possibly be that Washington is simply too big, too corrupt and too bloated to manage? For those of us who think so the future looks bleak. The federal trough is only gonna get bigger because the Washington sows are in heat and there is a new brood of piglets looking for a teet to suck on!

It used to be that hogs got fat and pigs got slaughtered. On the Obama farm things don’t work that way.

7,200 killed is bad, now let's compare, in Vietnam the number is 58,209, this happened primarily under Kennedy and Johnson, both Democrats, and the US wasn't attacked like on 9/11, it was purely political. Vietnam was the war where no battles were lost, but the war was, the first time that happened. But, Johnson wanted to fight two wars, the Vietnam war, and the war on poverty, this increased the cost of government. There is a reason for poverty here in the US, this is the land of opportunity, if one applies them self, works, learns, and takes risks, you can succeed without sticking your hand out. If all one wants to do is stick their hand out, they will never be successful. My philosophy has always been, if you want to eat, you have to work.

WaltUU so funny just so funny..

You say that but I hear pain and shame in your comments.

I didn't say one thing bad about you...

And I didn't say one thing bad about you... I'm criticizing perspectives you support, not you personally.

yet you went right on ahead with showing just how badly you want to force something down any ones throat

So advocating for compassion and consideration of others is "forcing something down someone's throat". I guess that says more about your perspectives than I could ever say.

its quite amazing, but nothing but rubbish.

Meanwhile, all you've been "contributing" is discussion about the discussion, instead of actually trying to defend the indefensible perspectives you support. That also says more about your perspectives than I could ever say.

all i did is count how many times you repeated the same comment and called it a tangent

In other words, instead of contributing something to the discussion, like I did, you sought to distract attention away from what I wrote by posting pointless meta-discussion, complaining about how other people post rather than posting your own perspectives about the topic.

just sick of seeing your rant

And I'm "sick" of seeing your efforts to derail discussions that aren't going the way you like.

Jax,

First, you tell me how many Americans died in Desert Fox!?

Jax A,

I missed going back to your quotes. Yes, they were saying that in 1998 when Iraq had and was destroying its WMD. By 2000 bush and the intelligence agency knew the truth , but kept it from the public and Congress!

Thank you for returning, WaltUU.

Thank you for walking and talking UU.

If only Christians acted as they say they believe.

Andy Blockwood,

Now lets go to 1958 when Eisenhower sent in the first advisers and the first troops. To start the ball rolling. I was against that war too as an illegal war and would have never gone if I had been drafted. the Hague issued warrants in that war as well! Maybe that is why the WORST PRESIDENT EVER is hiding in Texas on his ranch for most of the last 4 years!

Most Americans are fed-up with Washington , more than 43% from this left leaning web site blame all three, that include Congress and President Obama, if this poll goes to regular folks the percentage will be even higher. Neither both sides are coming with reasonable solutions that bring sanity to the economy of this country, Obama and Democrats promoting large government and government dependency trough thousands of programs, more taxes including to small business to support the grouth of government, more regulation to the job creators and a continuing rising of deficit , increasing the debt to promote populist measures and get the political endorsement of the populace ,with help of site like this internet media NBC news, that also contribute all thing happen, promoting biases news and no facts, favoring one side of the political spectrum. Republicans also doing their part no allowing more taxes to the richest of this country ( money that shoul be use to pay our debts) but is in part because there is no serious proposal from Obama and Democrats, both sides will be blamed for the inaction's , our member of congress and president Obama.

SmBusNY

Without looking was it something like 100?

I don't see why everyone is so outraged. The fact is, the country's populace is split just about 50-50 politically, and many of the divisive issues are ones which are difficult or impossible to compromise.....strict black/white, right/wrong. The pols are just carrying out the wishes of the voters who elected them. If you don't like their performance, elect someone else...that's how the system works

oskar,

Here is a little touch of reality for you. Our local medium sized town paper in the Midwest asked who the public would blame if we went over the cliff? I just checked and the amount was 80% would blame the republicans. They are a good indicator of the left leaning public that you are referring to!

clwyd,

I think the number is zero.

But no matter, the number has no comparison to Iraq under Bush, numbering in the thousands, all for nothing. Nothing to do with 9/11, nothing to do with WMD. They knew that.

Worried for our Children

I think you are correct, but maybe the government has gotten too large for them to control, just as some peoples personal finances get out of control. Maybe a debt therapist could do them some good. like explaining that you pick your smallest credit card and put more money in until it is paid off, then add what you were paying on that one to paying down the next smallest until it is gone. And so on.....

I will try to have a whack at it, one bill at a time. Handle them separately on their own merit.

1 Eliminate the AMT which was a failure and will now affect middle class families.

2 These are the tax rates for 2012

• 10% on taxable income from $0 to $17,400, plus
• 15% on taxable income over $17,400 to $70,700, plus
• 25% on taxable income over $70,700 to $142,700, plus
• 28% on taxable income over $142,700 to $217,450, plus
• 33% on taxable income over $217,450 to $388,350, plus
• 35% on taxable income over $388,35

"If" the rich are not paying their fair share, it is not the fault of the rates, it is a problem with loopholes and deductions. Close the loopholes and change deductions, eliminate the ability to offshore funds for the specific purpose of reducing taxes and make these tax schedules a true reflection of taxation.

And if rates must go up, which I don't have a problem with, do it incrementally at 1% a year on everyone over the course of 5 years to decrease the shock to the economy.

3 Over 90% of this countries wealth is held by those over 55, many of the same people who are collecting entitlements. SS was never designed to help the retired rich hold on to their nest eggs so they can grow. It was designed to keep the elderly above the poverty line. Some clamor for the rich to pay their share, well make all of them.

Make SS need based or remove the cap for contribution.

4 The average couple retiring with an income of $90,000 will have paid $114,000 into Medicare and will pull over $300,000 out. This is clearly not sustainable. Again, make it need based. Also, it must be slimmed down to only cover essentials. Sorry, but I don't believe I should be held responsible for buying Viagra for a geriatric.

5 Remove Medicaid and welfare from the SS system and don't allow use of the SS fund for general purposes.

6 Check for citizenship for every patient who can't pay for treatment. Fix them, and then deport them if they are not. One of the best ways to catch illegals is checking for those declaring ten dependents. They pay no taxes other than SS. The SS administration should be cross referenced with the IRS which is not currently the case.

7 We paid a trillion dollars last year for welfare and health care for welfare. There is a real need, but there are also abusers. There should be one fraud employee for every person who hands out money that actually leaves the office to verify proper use. There is no reason that some who choose to abuse the system have a higher standard of living than those that pay for them.

8 Finally, there should be across the board cuts in spending, especially defense. Not all at once, but a forced 2% per year until our debt is below let's say 5 trillion. What many refuse to accept because of the initial pain is that right now we are paying 43 cents on the dollar in interest on the debt. If we get that number down to 20 cents, 23 cents per dollar can be used to better our society.

Yes, they were saying that in 1998 when Iraq had and was destroying its WMD.

Now it gets good. And by "good," I mean hilarious in the way people like clwyd invent history when they're cornered.

If Iraq was destroying their weapons, why did we have to have Desert Fox at the end of 1998 in the first place? Where in those quotes do any of those people quoted explain that Iraq was actively destroying their own WMDs? While were at it, please give me some links showing that in 1998 Iraq was destroying their own WMDs...you know, the ones that existed in 1998 but not in 2001 and 2002.

I thought this was a news site, not Comedy Central. But please, clwd, provide us all with the proof of your laughable claims...we'll wait patiently.

We should just let it go over the cliff. Then obama can explain why he signed such a negatively impacting financial package into law. This is about the only way to get the "checkbook" out of obama's hands and cut back on his spending.

Remember what happened last time "congress" shoved through a bill that couldn't be read until after it was passed. Even those who were for it are now realizing what they shoved through.

obama hasn't had a budget since he has been in office, why is he so concerned about one now? Oh yeah, he will have the pen and checkbook wrenched from his grasp.

So Obama ran for President saying those words and he thinks that rich is $250,000 not the $1,000,000 that Bonehead, Cantor and McConnell think. To me rich is over $100,000. I wish Obama would demand a lower income amount!

Spider,

That's not quite true, it's not just voting your guy in. The popular vote for candidates in the House was over 50% Democratic, yet more Republicans won. In the Senate I believe it was over 60%. Yet look at the numbers of representatives in both chambers. Unpopulated Red States are over-represented in the Senate, and House districts are gerrymandered to over-represent Republicans. It's not just voting, it's also system process. Republicans are winning at that. Demographics are changing and it won't work forever.

Jax,

First, you tell me how many Americans died in Desert Fox!?

Zero. And yes, thousands of young Americans died in Iraq and Afghanistan, very sad, indeed.

And Desert Fox and the invasion of Iraq were done with the same reasoning, WMDs. It's just that the left like to claim it was a lie in 2001 and 2002, but the truth at the end of 1998 so they could pretend they had nothing to do with the very wars they voted for.

I stop! You win! You can't get through someone who can demand everything to links. I find that most of those had high intake of FOX News links which are often unreliable and not in touch with reality!

"Nothing is so firmly believed as that which is least known!" I'm referring to the right and people like Spence, Roy and now Jax. A.

Have a Happy New year!

Jax A, Desert Storm was not O. Check your link again!

Jax A,

the reason I know it wasn't zero is we had a local boy die and one in the neighboring state die! Sorry, No link!

To me rich is over $100,000.

Either you're very young, very disingenuous, very naive, or live in a part of the country with a ridiculously low cost of living...or all of the above. It might sound like a lot based on what mommy and daddy give you for an allowance, but it many parts of the country, 100k is actually considered middle class with the high costs of living.

In fact, bumbling blithering Biden called himself "middle class" when he made $379k. I guess he didn't get the memo that Obama considers you rich if you make $250k (combined) or $200k (single), regardless of where you live.

http://www.whitehousedossier.com/2012/07/11/biden-considers-379k-income-middle-class/

Okay, I am going to take off my "partisan" hat for a moment and make a comment (or suggestion?) that I have been wondering for over 20 years.

When a business has a new idea they "test it" first. Say a retailer believes a store selling just oven mitts would be successful. Do they run out and open 200 stores across the country and in every state only to find out it might not work or costs more than they thought? No, they open one store and test it. If it appears to work then open 2 or 3 more and test further. Only THEN will they consider an across the board new retail format. Why can't our government (BOTH PARTIES!!) use that same logic?

For example: Conservatives believe less government and lower taxes create economic growth and raises the standard of living for everybody. Liberals disagree. So why don't we "test it" first? Let a state be the "guinea pig". Find a Conservative state that is willing to "test" then lower taxes and government regulations and TRY IT first!! Try it for three years and see if companies move in or move out. See if consumers buy more or do not. See if the standard of living rises or fall. If it doesn't work then I will be the FIRST to stand up and say it didn't work. But at least we only have to reverse ONE state rather than the whole country. And if it DOES work then find 2-3 more states willing to "try". If enough EVIDENCE shows it is successful then discussion on a countrywide implementation can take place.

And why couldn't we do ObamaCare that way? Liberals love the idea of government controlled health care and claim it will lower costs. Conservatives disagree. Why can't we "test it" first? Find a liberal state willing to be a "guinea pig" and try it for three years. If it works I'll be the FIRST person to stand up and say I am wrong. But if it DOESN'T work then we only have to reverse ONE state rather than 50 states. We signed a 2000 page law that nobody read and is being implemented across 50 states and affecting 300 million people?

You see Republicans and Democrats fight like cats and dogs so NEITHER side gets leveraged in their philosophy so since it is always a mixture of liberal and conservative laws the economy and people always suffer. Then Republicans get some leverage and push mostly their ideas in new laws. Then Democrats get some leverage and push mostly their ideas in new laws. But neither have time to really settle what is BEST!!

Liberals want a more "socialist" society. Let them have it. Initiate it in ONE state. Everything they want. Then lets see if people move TO that state or AWAY from that state. See if companies move TO that state or AWAY from that state. See if tax revenues increase or decrease. See if standard of living increases or decreased.

Conservatives want a society with less government, less taxes, and more individual freedoms. Let us have it. Initiate ONE state. Everything we want. Then lets see if people and companies move TO or AWAY from that state. See if tax revenues increase or decrease. See if standard of living increases or decreases. The PEOPLE will decide what system they want to live in based on where they decide to live.

How could Conservatives OR Liberals dispute that concept? Liberals constantly speak about how Conservatives (aka Tea Party/Republicans/Libertarians/etc.) BLOCK everything. Well here would be the chance for Liberals to live in a state with NO Conservatives. Pass anything you want. Let see how your state turns out. And we Conservatives can live in a state with NO Liberals. Pass anything we want.

So let's say the Conservative state limits unemployment and puts restrictions on how to file. If the unemployed don't like it they can move to the state that is more accommodating. And in the Liberal state if you want to raise taxes go ahead and raise taxes. If that is what the liberals in that state want then welcome to it.

How can anybody be against letting each "philosophy" have their own state to test out their policies. Sounds to me like a perfect solution AND will also answer the age old question on which philosophy is better for society.

JaxA

Thank you, right, NONE.

NONE. NO AMERICANS WERE KILLED in OPERATION DESERT FOX.

We can argue all day about what constitutes a "lie" but the bottom line is that the Iraq war killed thousands upon thousands of Americans based on that demonstrated LIE, while Desert Fox killed NO AMERICANS due to that "lie."

clwyd...I'm sorry if links and quotes and actual evidence all prove my point and embarrass you. Maybe you should be better informed before making a fool of yourself.

Jax A, Desert Storm was not O. Check your link again!

I don't even know what that means. I was talking about the democrats using WMDs as their reason for Desert Fox.

the reason I know it wasn't zero is we had a local boy die and one in the neighboring state die! Sorry, No link!

There was a "local boy" and "one from a neighboring state" who died in the 1998 bombing of Iraq? Hmmm, I guess Bill Clinton and the rest of the world never got the memo about the casualties from Desert Fox!

Please...keep the comedy coming!!

ProBusiness

Conservatives believe less government and lower taxes create economic growth and raises the standard of living for everybody. Liberals disagree. So why don't we "test it" first?

We've been testing it for 30 years. Tax CUT and SPEND has ONLY caused our debt to increase.

http://zfacts.com/p/gross-national-debt.html

Liberals don't just "disagree" with your quote. We believe a strong middle class creates growth, not through tax cuts, but through policies that promote a thriving middle class. Social Security, envisioned and created by Democrats frees middle aged Americans to work and be productive rather than having to take care of their parents. Same for Medicare. Same for Unemployment Insurance, the list goes on and on. Things that Republicans have always opposed. Things that support the middle class, the people who buy things that make wealthy people wealthy.

Wealth is built from work, not capital. That's what we believe.

Most of the above posts simply typify what the problem is. Mouth-breathers on both sides either vilifying or singing the praises of the left or the right. WAKE THE HELL UP!!! BOTH sides are ruining this country and until people stop clinging to a single party, regardless of performance or facts, we will continue down the crapper. Read these posts over again and it sounds like Congress itself. No solutions or positive, constructive comments. No meeting in the middle. Simply mud-slinging, finger pointing and blaming ANYBODY other than "our side." I wondering if Romans had similar problems near the end of their republic.

I am a veteran and a professional firefighter and I am SICK of serving the few whiners and entitled on BOTH sides who screw the majority of us who could give a rat's a** less about democratsor republican. I am going over to rosettastone.com to order their Mandarin Chinese package. I want to be ahead of the curve when they take us down.

Jax,

Stop being a d!ck. Clwd is just confusing Storm with Fox.

Storm: 256, Fox: zero.

None of it is comedy or funny in any way, so stop laughing about it.

I am voting for a change in 2014. The do nothing Congress needs new blood.

JS69,

There are demonstrable FACTS that we can look at in the Conservative trickle down experiment that we've been running for 30 years. The facts are that it doesn't work.

http://zfacts.com/p/gross-national-debt.html

It's not just US and THEM. We are ALL US.

Stop believing the doomsayers. They want you to believe we're doomed for THEIR benefit.

Don't go learn Chinese for crying out loud. Spend that time working to make your country better. Run for office. You're a veteran and a firefighter! You've done harder things! I'm sure you have a good story.

JaxA

Thank you, right, NONE.

NONE. NO AMERICANS WERE KILLED in OPERATION DESERT FOX.

We can argue all day about what constitutes a "lie" but the bottom line is that the Iraq war killed thousands upon thousands of Americans based on that demonstrated LIE, while Desert Fox killed NO AMERICANS due to that "lie."

And yet, it doesn't seem to stop the left from CONSTANTLY claiming that it was "Bush's lie" that tricked those poor unsuspecting democrats into VOTING for Iraq, and the costs that went with it. We're all still waiting for the left to admit that they're just as responsible for the costs of "Bush's wars" when they used the very same reasoning at the end of 1998 when Bush wasn't even in the picture.

Guess we'll all be waiting a long time for them to own up to it.

The fact that all of you posted that no one in congress has a brain and all on the take, Boehner is stupid and how we got on to Desert Fox God only knows.

If Boehner gave Obama what he wanted lets go nuts for a minute. lets say Obama was given the tax anyone over $250.000 and no spending cuts, and increase of 2 trillion in spending Obama would say no to that because he wants to take us over the cliff.

Now what happens to the GOP if we go over the cliff? Obama gets the next two years to use the GOP as an example of why you should vote for Democrats so he has total control of congress. The GOP will always stand in the way of progress and the uninformed out there will vote total control of congress to the democrats in 2014. Obama will use the Constitution as TP and take total control of the debt limit who is their to stop him. Obama will use what happens to spend more money and faster than it can be printed and all you supporters of Obama you must think you going to get some of it. But you won't it will go to unions and supporters with deep pockets. Obama will not need you the middle class now you have served his needs to get him to this point.

Now what happens if congress agrees to some kind of bill if this happens. Obama has no one to blame, Obama owns this whole mess he got us into, no more blaming Bush and the GOP. It will be up to him to come up with a way to pay down the 6 trillion he spent in the first 4 years. It will be up to Obama to make Obama care a low cost health care program. the only way is to kill off all the old people. Remember the first few word of the Constitution is we the people Obama works for us not we do what he commands. We done away with that in 1776. Its time we put the GOP in total control of the congress to stop anymore damage Obama will do to this country.

SmBusOwnerinNY

We've been testing it for 30 years. Tax CUT and SPEND has ONLY caused our debt to increase.

Wrong , tax cut and cut spending only happened for short period of time and IT WORKS,however most of the time , include during Bush did not happened , lower taxes must go along with smaller government on order to work, our big fat government continue growing.

The writer of this article once again promotes the False Equivalency lie by claiming that Americans are "bipartisan" in assigning blame for this latest economic crisis manufactured by the extremist Republican Party. But then they note:

“Essentially, right now, 25 percent of the public approves of the job the GOP congressional leaders are doing and 40 percent approves of the job the Democratic leaders are doing,” said Jocelyn Kiley, a senior researcher for the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press.

That's a 15-point difference in favor of the Democrats. And it would be higher if the corporate media wasn't misinforming the public about what's really behind this fiasco: the "Denny Hastert" rule that when Republicans hold the majority in the House of Representatives, no bill can be introduced for a vote unless a "majority of the majority" backing it. The purpose of this rule is to deny the Democrats of any significant role in passing legislation. John Boehner is following that rule, but while he denies the Democrats a role in passing legislation, his wretched tea bag contingent can't pass ANY legislation on their own, not even Boehner's own proposal to raise taxes only on people making more than 1 million dollars.

With Alan West and a number of other equally crazy tea baggers kicked out of office by voters in the November election, the House will be marginally less insane after the new Congress convenes next month. If the country is to be saved from the Republican-created disaster, it's only going to occur then, and I'm not so sure about that, either. The incompetent John Boehner will still be Speaker of the House, thanks to the gerrymandering after 2010 that denied the Democrats the majority they would have if the will of the voters had been honored. (The total vote for Democratic candidates for the House was a million more than the Republicans candidates.)

ProBusiness,

After actually reading though your whole post, these experiments already exist. Take New York and Alabama. New York has a strong safety net and high taxes. Alabama, not. Which is a giver state and which is a taker state? Right, New York is a huge giver state to the Federal coffers, Alabama, a taker. Which has higher levels of education, lower divorce, life expectancy? You got it, New York. I could go on.

The experiment is done. You may have your ideas about what our ideas are, but your conclusions are wrong. Liberalism has created EVERYTHING good about this nation. The nation itself was founded by crazy liberal people who thought that humans shouldn't be ruled by kings. That was a radical (liberal) idea at the time. Slavery? Women's right to vote? 40 hour work week, no child labor? Medical care for the elderly, Social Security? All promoted by Liberals and fought tooth and nail by Conservatives of the day.

You may find a way to characterize those things somehow as sloth, but I'll take 5% sloth for the system we've got any day. Humanity has copied our model for 200 years, and there's a reason. Democracy (a wildly liberal idea) is better than the servitude to the King and fiefdom any day. The people, the middle class is the most important thing to prevent tyranny. When everybody has a stake, everybody wants to make the system work.

What scares me the most is more and more thinking Reagan's claim is true, that Government is the problem. Who benefits from the people not believing in their democratic government? Those who want there to be Kings again.

...and how we got on to Desert Fox God only knows.

Quite simple, actually. The whiny ignorant democrats (redundant, I know) keep blaming our debt problems on "Bush's wars." I was just pointing out how the democrats voted for those wars, and the left can't keep screaming that they had no responsibility for the costs of those wars because of "lies"... when they used the same "lies" (WMDs) for bombing Iraq at the end of 1998.

Gossamer Wings

I am voting for a change in 2014. The do nothing Congress needs new blood.

Starting people like the old Harry "dirty" Reid who spend his time playing politics and the blame game.

Jax,

Who CARES about the reasoning??? Iraq got us thousands killed. Fox killed NONE!

Some Democrats voted for the war authorization, based on intel that Bush KNEW was wrong, and that got THOUSANDS killed.

Even if Clinton make his case on "lies", Desert FOX didn't kill ANY Americans.

Big difference.

Oskar,

Tax CUT and SPEND has never worked.

You are correct that we've never tried Tax cut and spending cut. Republicans have never done it, even though they claim to want it.

I'll take the fiscally responsible TAX and SPEND over TAX CUT and SPEND any day.

At least that's honest. Claiming to be the party of TAX CUT and SPENDING CUT, while NEVER doing it, is not.

http://zfacts.com/p/1195.html

SmBusOwner...try to follow how we got onto this topic. It's when the left just keeps throwing out "Bush's Wars" as an empty soundbyte for why our debt is so high. When pointing out that the democrats VOTED for Iraq and all its costs (and casualties), the left's next nano-second knee-jerk response is always "it's because Bush lied." It makes 1998, Desert Fox and all of Clinton's, Albright's, Pelosi's and Berger's quotes awfully inconvenient, huh?

But explain to me how Bush KNEW it was a lie, but Clinton didn't. Funny, I don't remember weapons inspections being too available for either president from 1998 until 2002...oops, yet another reason. Let me guess, the UN was lying with 1441 and all the previous resolutions?

Sorry, keep flailing, but the democrats VOTED for Iraq and all the financial and human costs, and they used the VERY SAME REASONING Clinton used at the end of 1998 to bomb Iraq. They can't blame Bush and the republicans for doing so, no matter how hard they desperately keep trying to rewrite history and blame our debt on him.

Jax, @ # 1.41

you are the whiny, fat, don't get what I want so I'll complain until I get it, baby. Oh, and beyond ignorant of facts and history, distracting at all costs from what matters.

There, some vacuous insults to level the playing field into the mud where you like it.

BUSH started the IRAQ War. BUT FOR BUSH, no one was going after Saddam Hussein, because of the 9/11 EXCUSE.

It cost us over a $Trillion and thousands of lives that we would have, BUT FOR BUSH.

Republicans, Republicans are the source of our financial problems, not Democrats. Democrats have been the ONLY fiscally responsible force in the last 30 years. they ARE the reason we have the debt we do.

http://zfacts.com/p/1195.html

Refute it, just try.

@SmBusOwnerinNY,

Respectfully, you can only beat a dog so long before he bites you. I have consistently voted on individual merit, but now find it harder to find each election. Face it, the majority of people vote for the candidate who will do the least damage. In fact, I voted Libertarian this last election, after doing some research. I was summarily told I had "thrown my vote away." Need I say more?

This system we have has become so broken, it isn't even funny anymore. bill maher is an arrogant liberal ass and rush limbaugh is simply crazy. And these are the people many turn to for "facts."

And just to clarify, I only brought up the fact that I am a vet and firefighter to show that I AM actually involved in trying to do my part. It's just that after so long, the rain on my back is starting to smell like the piss it is.

I have an autistic son, and I have sat up many nights, when the demons come, thinking of what the future holds for him. We are handing him and every other child under the age of 18 a broken down machine. We ran the crap out it, we never changed the oil or maintained it, and are perfectly content to have them pay for the overhaul or do without. Both sides continue to drive it into the ground and blame the other. What the heck?

How many times do I have to say it JAX, Clinton's Desert Fox didn't COST US ANYTHING, so there is a BIG difference in your "equivalency"

Have a look at my:

http://zfacts.com/p/1195.html link

I don't say it's "all Bush's fault" but it's partly Bush's fault. It's mostly Reagan's fault, actually. He set the stage and you guys have been TAX CUTTING and SPENDING ever since.

SmBusinessOwner

BUSH started the IRAQ War.

Unlike Obama who bombed Libya without Congressional approval, Bush got approval from Congress. I know facts and history are democrat's worst enemy, but here, I'll help you:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Resolution

An authorization by Congress was sought by President George W. Bush soon after his September 12, 2002, statement before the U.N. General Assembly asking for quick action by the Security Council in enforcing the resolutions against Iraq.^[4][5]

Of the legislation introduced by Congress in response to President Bush's requests,^[6]S.J.Res. 45 sponsored by Sen. Daschle & Sen. Lott was based on the original White House proposal authorizing the use of force in Iraq, H.J.Res. 114 sponsored by Rep. Hastert & Rep. Gephardt and the substantially similar S.J.Res. 46 sponsored by Sen. Lieberman were modified proposals. H.J.Res. 110 sponsored by Rep. Hastings was a separate proposal never considered on the floor. Eventually, the Hastert-Gephardt proposal became the legislation Congress focused on.

Introduced in Congress on October 2, 2002, in conjunction with the Administration's proposals,^[2][7]H.J.Res. 114 passed the House of Representatives on Thursday afternoon at 3:05 p.m. EDT on October 10, 2002, by a vote of 296-133,^[8] and passed the Senate after midnight early Friday morning, at 12:50 a.m. EDT on October 11, 2002, by a vote of 77-23.^[9] It was signed into law as Pub.L. 107-243 by President Bush on October 16, 2002.

See that? Congress VOTED for it. Congress, not Bush. A Congress with votes coming from Reid, Biden, Kerry, Hillary, and a whole lot of other dems.

It's amazing to see democrats like SmBusinessOwner who will vehemently deny actual facts.

JS69,

I don't have an answer for you other than to keep trying and get involved as much as you can. I feel the same way as you do--pretty impotent to actually change things. All we can do is keep demanding those who represent us to follow through on what they say they are going to do. Contact your representatives. Tell them what you need and want. Best wishes in the New Year for you, and especially your son. Keep up the good work. Remember that it is Democrats that have championed making mental health parity with physical health in healthcare legislation. Republicans always fight it.

http://zfacts.com/p/1195.html

Refute it, just try.

Gladly.

Obama added more to our debt in three years than Bush did in eight. I've already proven that the democrats willingly voted for Iraq and its costs, so that throws that little "Bush's unfunded war" soundbyte right out the window.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57400369-503544/national-debt-has-increased-more-under-obama-than-under-bush/

Jax,

Keep obfuscating.

My very next sentence said that without Bush coming up the the great idea to invade Iraq, Congress would never have voted at all, ergo, it is Bush's war.

Now let's take it back to the money.

Who's debt is it?

http://zfacts.com/p/1195.html

Jax A

But explain to me how Bush KNEW it was a lie, but Clinton didn't. Funny, I don't remember weapons inspections being too available for either president from 1998 until 2002...oops, yet another reason. Let me guess, the UN was lying with 1441 and all the previous resolutions?

Where did you get that garbage from? There WERE weapons inspectors in Iraq prior to Bush's Iraq debacle. They told Bush there was no evidence of Iraqi WMD, but Bush ignored them. And Karl Rove warned Hans Blix, the chief UN weapons inspector in Iraq, that he, Rove, would make sure Blix was discredited after the invasion and all those WMDs were rounded up. The inspectors were forced to leave Iraq to avoid being killed by Bush's bombs. There were no WMDs, but Rove went on to be a highly paid talking head on Fox News. It was Rove who should have been discredited, not Blix. But at least Rove got his just deserts after his rosy predictions of a Romney victory in November.

As for Clinton, he may have suspected Saddam Hussein was building a WMD capability, but he's not the one who invaded Iraq, and he certainly didn't cook up the despicable lie that Iraq was involved in the 9/11 attacks, which occurred on Bush's watch, not Clinton's.

I'll take the fiscally responsible TAX and SPEND

SBO

Who does that?

Obama?LOL

Jax @ #1.51

....and without the debt we were in due to Republican policies of the previous 27 years, the recession spending wouldn't have been a problem at all.

http://zfacts.com/p/gross-national-debt.html

Just look at the graph. what direction was the debt going in 1979? What direction was it going in 1981 to 1993? What direction was is going from 1993 to 2001? What direction was it going from 2001 to 2008? What direction is is going now? The same direction that was started in 2008.

Like we can't blame "it all" on "W" Bush, neither can you blame it all on Obama. Admit it.

SmBusOwnerinNY

ProBusiness

Conservatives believe less government and lower taxes create economic growth and raises the standard of living for everybody. Liberals disagree. So why don't we "test it" first?

We've been testing it for 30 years. Tax CUT and SPEND has ONLY caused our debt to increase.

Liberals don't just "disagree" with your quote. We believe a strong middle class creates growth, not through tax cuts, but through policies that promote a thriving middle class. Social Security, envisioned and created by Democrats frees middle aged Americans to work and be productive rather than having to take care of their parents. Same for Medicare. Same for Unemployment Insurance, the list goes on and on. Things that Republicans have always opposed. Things that support the middle class, the people who buy things that make wealthy people wealthy.

Wealth is built from work, not capital. That's what we believe.

#1.131 -

Evidently you are not much of a small business owner, if you believe what you just wrote. (I guess you are self employed, at most and have no employees)

Small business is the Wealth Creator, or at least historically it has been. That was the American Dream 100 years ago. To be your own boss, and own your own property. Not to be a serf to his noble Lord.

And what a pile of Democrats Propaganda crap. "Social Security, envisioned and created by Democrats frees middle aged Americans to work and be productive rather than having to take care of their parents" Yeah well the Democrats ENVISION a lot of things, and the road to Hell is paved with Good Intentions. OASDI was never meant for everybody. The fact that everyone is now eligible is what is killing it, and it was a stunt to garner more votes.

"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can exist only until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largess from the public treasury. From that time on the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the results that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy."

And I know there is not a single Democrat or liberal that understands or will acknowledge the Truth of the above statement.

And as far as "Testing" goes, we have been 'testing' the liberal Progressive strategy for the last 50 years. The result: More people dependent on the Government, More violence in the cities, More Random mass shooting, More teenage Pregnancy, A larger divide between the haves and the have nots, i.e huge income and wealth disparity.

The further we get from the true intent of the Constitution, the more disparity there will be. The 10th Amendment does not allow the Federal Government to operate a Social Security Trust Fund, (go look it up) the SCOTUS declared it a tax to be paid into the general fund (so there is no Trust Fund to be Robbed or Borrowed from) nor does it allow the Government to operate a Health Insurance Program, unless you call it a tax, etc. The Corrupt SCOTUS should have kicked these programs back to the people and asked for a Constitutional Amendment, and not granted them legal status by caveat.

But there you have it. Since the 1930's with the beginning of Gun Control, and Social Engineering (justice) we have seen the crumbling of the core of America. The paradigm used to be "Work hard, make you own way, take care of your family, be your own boss, own your own property" Today it is "Go to school, get an educations, and go to work for someone else, don't worry about you family(somebody else will take care of them {daycare, schools, college, senior care}, and you can own your own HOME.

The government will pay for all of it, Aid to Women with Dependent Children(welfare) WIC (food Stamps) Public Schools and Universities (overrun with liberal educators indoctrinating the students), Student Grants and Loans (to be paid back?) and you can buy a house with a Government Backed loan (the Community Reinvestment Act 1994) {The Root of the Mortgage Meltdown by the way} [did I mention the Republicans didn't get control of congress until '95] Even your Retirement, And now health care.

The only thing the Constitution allows the Federal Government to do is Provide for the common Defense (Protection) and Regulate commerce "Among" or between the Sovereign States not in them and ensure the rights of the people are equally applied by the states, not the individuals.(i.e. If I don't want to serve White people or Asians in my restaurant or what ever store, then I don't have too, I reserve the Right to refuse service to anyone)

And one more thing:

In the last 80 years, The Democrats have held simultaneous control of both houses for 52 of those years, of course in that same period the Republicans have only had simultaneous control of both houses in only 14 of those years. Yet some how, all the nations ills are the Republicans fault? Curious.

Democrats held the House from 1955 to 1995, and the Senate from 1955 to 1995 (except the Reagan Years) Funny thing, gun violence seemed to peak in the mid 90's and has since been falling, about the same time the Republicans took over congress. Coincidence?

Oaskar,

Obama's trying to tax at least. Romney wanted to tax cut. More of the same.

We gotta pay for what we've got. It's only an argument about who is going to pay.

I don't think current or future SS or MC recipients should pay. They'be been paying.

the "rich" have been getting some nice tax breaks for a long time. I think those should end right away.

I think the rest of us should pay too, but those increase should be spread out to avoid killing the economy. I'd be for Clinton rates phased back in over 5 years.

Gotta pay for what we get.

Personally, I wish Boehner would just shut the H''', up and do what the Democrats want, and in two years after it is all cobbled up, may be we can get some Republicans (who have clue) in there to clean up the mess.

But this fighting over a couple percentage points on a couple hundred thousand is asinine, and it is making him look bad, even though it is the Commie in the White House that is forcing the issue, as he won't compromise on it either. (I understand the war of the of the wills) But it is time to let Odumber win this one and show the American People he is not about helping them, rather he is about controlling them, just the ACA is not for healthcare reform, but healthcare control.

@kaluhiokalani, time for a big luau Brah...

Why, with the financial situation in its present state did BHO fly to Hawaii at all? A real leader would have shown the level of altruism demanded by his office as President, stayed in D.C. and held John Boehner and Harry Reid's feet to the fire to get their acts and houses together and take care of business.

Small wonder that I didn't vote for him, but it's time for the community organizer to step and perform something in keeping with the requirements of the office, that doesn't involve burning fuel in Air Force 1 and Marine 1.

John Boehner is a disgrace to his office and Harry Reid is no better. Our elected upper class deserves no accolades for this dismal performance and our President should have taken the 'bully pulpit' of some talk show to verbally chastise them 'in toto' for being nothing more than recalcitrant brats. The election's over so Barry can now use Letterman or Leno to do something constructive for the benefit of the country instead of taking another Hawai'ian Christmas on the taxpayer's dollar.

How many times do I have to say it JAX, Clinton's Desert Fox didn't COST US ANYTHING, so there is a BIG difference in your "equivalency"

Yes, Desert Fox was free. It literally cost us nothing.

Sure, it wasn't as much as the cost of invading Iraq, but please state it as such instead of a ridiculous hyperbolic "it didn't cost us anything" laugh track.

I don't say it's "all Bush's fault" but it's partly Bush's fault. It's mostly Reagan's fault, actually. He set the stage and you guys have been TAX CUTTING and SPENDING ever since.

Are you really that obtuse or is your memory so bad you can't remember that you DID say it was "but for Bush?"

BUSH started the IRAQ War. BUT FOR BUSH, no one was going after Saddam Hussein, because of the 9/11 EXCUSE.

It cost us over a $Trillion and thousands of lives that we would have, BUT FOR BUSH.

Seems like you were blaming it all on Bush, that's OK, like most democrats, you have a selective memory, yours just can't even remember what you said a few minutes ago, obviously.

And now we're going back to Reagan? I guess blaming Bush just isn't enough. We're 4 years into Obama's administration, and it's still not Obama's economy. I wonder when it will be?

How can anybody be against letting each "philosophy" have their own state to test out their policies.

Propose a constitutional manner by which your chosen test state would remain a closed system, and then we'll talk. If people in the test state can pick-up and move to another state to gain access to more affordable health care (for example) then your test is invalid.

We have had that problem here in my area: You can conceive of New Hampshire as a "test state" for lower taxes. Massachusetts is the #8 most highly-taxed state. New Hampshire is the #7 LEAST taxed state. So what happens? Loads of people pick-up and move from Massachusetts to New Hampshire, to take advantage of that. In the meantime, since New Hampshire is raising less taxes overall than Massachusetts, they cut state expenditures, the most significant being the reduction in investment in fostering emerging industries. So all these people moved to New Hampshire, but were taking advantage of the great jobs in Massachusetts. Not a closed system - exploiters exploit if you let them. To close the system, Massachusetts now charges out-of-state residents earning income in Massachusetts significant income tax. Balance is restored, but what you were trying to show with your test, disproven.

And we actually can see this happening in the larger sense: The states that suck the most from the federal teat are red states; blue states are effectively subsidizing those who bitch and moan about taxes to support entitlements that those red states take more than their fair share of.

clywd

Yes, the Democrats believed the lies fed to them by bush who wanted to go to war to avenge his father being insulted by Saddam. Lies and knowingly fed to the politicians and America! Far worse than Bengazi.

If that was so, why did the Democrats in Congress lean so heavily on Dennis Kucinich twice to remove his bills for impeaching Bush over the wars?

There isn't one shred of evidence that any of that is true. It is alarming enough that people spew such false accusations, but worse yet to actually believe them!

My very next sentence said that without Bush coming up the the great idea to invade Iraq, Congress would never have voted at all, ergo, it is Bush's war.

Is this a joke? Is this supposed to be funny?

You mean Congress had no will of its own and couldn't vote against it? You mean, Congress is never responsible for anything they pass because someone else put it in front of them?!?

Wow. Some stupidity you have to read to believe!

DUMB, (you said it not me)

Evidently you are not much of a small business owner

you're good at making up what you don't know...

And what a pile of Democrats Propaganda crap. "Social Security, envisioned and created by Democrats frees middle aged Americans to work and be productive rather than having to take care of their parents"

But the facts are that liberals created it, and conservatives fought it, just like the arrangement for EVERYTHING good, and I'll throw in good music and good sex. HA!

And as far as "Testing" goes, we have been 'testing' the liberal Progressive strategy for the last 50 years. The result: More people dependent on the Government, More violence in the cities, More Random mass shooting, More teenage Pregnancy, A larger divide between the haves and the have nots, i.e huge income and wealth disparity.

Sure a few are dependent on government, and there is a moral hazard there, but it's not 47%, it's like 3%. Since more than 3% were literally starving in the streets, I'm willing to pay that price. violence is actually down, and income disparity is clearly tied to tax policy workers' declining power in the marketplace. Those are both Conservative ideas (trickle down and union-busting).

Democrats held the House from 1955 to 1995, and the Senate from 1955 to 1995 (except the Reagan Years) Funny thing, gun violence seemed to peak in the mid 90's and has since been falling, about the same time the Republicans took over congress. Coincidence?

yes, that's a coincidence. :- )

A strong middle class that grew astoundingly in the mid 20th century was built on high taxes that forced the rich to reinvest in this country. The rich, God bless them, didn't want to give 90% to the government, so they invested in tax deductible things, like wages and equipment, American equipment, creating jobs, good paying jobs. Now, low tax rates promote pulling out your stake and sending the proceeds to the Cayman Islands to avoid even the 15% they government wants to take.

How is that good for America?

Houston, why did the UN have resolution 1441 and all the previous resolutions if Iraq was cooperating with the inspections processes? Another thing the left seems to forget.

It all boils down to the left's hypocrisy. No one really knew what Iraq had in 1998 nor 2002 for weapons because they weren't cooperating. The left just wants us to believe that it was OK for Clinton to bomb Iraq at the end of 1998 because of WMDs, but that the democrats were "tricked" into believing they had them in 2001 and 2002.

Sorry, dems, you willingly voted for Iraq and all its costs with the same reasoning Clinton used to bomb them in December 1998.

Jax,

Are you dumb, like DUMB?

What part of "if Bush didn't introduce the idea of invading Iraq, it wouldn't have happened" don't you understand?

No Bush Iraq proposal, no vote, no war.

As for "costing nothing" that is relative, of course. I'm sure Desert Fox cost something in money, maybe $1B(?), but it truly cost nothing in American lives. Compare those to the Iraq War, they are "nothing."

I'm not going to keep going back and forth with you.

Sm Businessman

You remind me of a certian local liberal who calls in daily to a local talk show. I think I actually know that guy. Self employed, makes 7,000 or 8,000 a year. Says the same kind of things you do.

Let me explain something to you. America made a big mistake in the 1930's that they should never have made. That is start to fully trust politicians and government to handle their retirement. In 80 years has matters really gotten better?

Politicians have no problem promising anything, because if they don't, they won't get elected. What's it really matter to them anyhow, they can make it law that someone else other than who voted for them pays for it.

Social Security is the promise of far less than you could get privately for the same money but more than what the government can and will pay because of where government invested it. I think the fault goes with the voters who trusted the politicians with their money. In the end it is no different than making a bad investment decision. Those who trusted as well as thoughs who didn't want to trust, like me, are going to have share in paying for the majorities misplaced trust by getting less than what the government promised.

Where is Obama in all of this?

A. On vacation in Hawaii?

B. Delegating to the Senate to find a fix?

C. Court side at a Bulls game?

D. Changing his original proposal and moving the goal post as soon as he was re-elected.

E. All of the above.

Truth is any of these answers are correct at any point in time. I have no objection to someone taking a vacation...but some things are more important. And sorry BO, our economy trumps your annual vacation. And you should be personally involved in these discussions every hour of every day, not delegating at this late hour.

Nice work ethic for a "leader".

Jax,

It all boils down to the left's hypocrisy.

Who is the hypocrite? The self-proclaimed party of "fiscal responsibility" destroying the fiscal condition of the country?

You still haven't come back with anything about the $12 Trillion Republican Debt.

http://zfacts.com/p/1195.html

I'm still willing to talk about that with you.

Are you dumb, like DUMB?

What part of "if Bush didn't introduce the idea of invading Iraq, it wouldn't have happened" don't you understand?

No Bush Iraq proposal, no vote, no war.

Wow, so Congress is never responsible for the outcome of what they vote for! If it's put in front of them, they have no culpability for their decisions on it. If it's a good idea or a bad idea, it doesn't matter...the fault, the credit, the consequence or the benefit of the idea rests solely on the people who came up with the idea, not for the people who decided weather or not the idea will actually be implemented!

Man, this is some of the best comedy I've read in a looooooooooooong time!

You heard it here, people, SmBusinessOwner just admitted this "reasoning."

Thank you for clearing up just how far liberals will go to blame everyone but themselves.

DB,

Let me assure you, I'm not the guy you're talking about.

No need to be condescending. I'm an American, just like you.

Let me explain something to you. America made a big mistake in the 1930's that they should never have made. That is start to fully trust politicians and government to handle their retirement. In 80 years has matters really gotten better?

If you don't think thing are better then they were in the 1930's, it's you that needs to be condescended to.

Social Security is the promise of far less than you could get privately for the same money

But the fact are that the vast majority of the population wouldn't save, and don't now. Government does things for people that they wouldn't do for themselves, and those things are good for society as a whole. That's the purpose of government. Sorry, that's just reality. Social safety has been good for the country, whether you believe it or not.

Give us a break TRex,

4 days in his home state over Christmas, when everybody else is out of town too, is too much?

Work ethic? He's the one who called everybody back to the table yesterday.

SmBusinessLoser...I did, I pasted a link to an article, whether you like its contents or not. Costs of "the wars" falls on both parties, as much as the left wants to scream otherwise.

Your laughably slanted blurb doesn't want to address what my article points out as clear fact that Obama added more to our debt in three years than Bush did in eight, unless of course, you think CBS isn't a reputable news site because it doesn't lean as far to the left as DNCNews NBC"News."

only in Congress can you have a job that you:

- were never trained for

- need not have any experience or qualifications

- get by virtue of being able to survive a crazy background check by the media

- get lifetime medical insurance for $30 a month

- get lifetime pension at regular pay in most cases

- blatantly insider trade, go on junkets, profit through legislation, manipulate the legal system, waste the taxpayers dollars and a million other shocking things

if life were fair, in order to get into congress, you would be required to :

- divest yourself of all investments

- recuse yourself on conflict issues

- have a college education in governance, economics, foreign affairs, and history

- take an oath to divide religion and government

but that will never happen.... Congress will continue to be filled with dentists and lawyers and butt kissers who don't know what the right thing to do is....

Jax,

What part of "if Bush didn't introduce the idea of invading Iraq, it wouldn't have happened" don't you understand?

It's not astonishing. It's called logic. I'll stand with it.

I'm not going to keep going back and forth with you.

Jax A

Houston, why did the UN have resolution 1441 and all the previous resolutions if Iraq was cooperating with the inspections processes? Another thing the left seems to forget.

That was a vote rammed through the Security Council and was based on the same bogus evidence of nonexistent WMDs that Bush and Cheney used to bamboozle the Senate Democrats. The facts that you won't admit is that there were weapons inspectors in Iraq right up until Bush's bombs started dropping, they found no evidence of WMDs, and they were proven right. Bush was proven to at best be a clueless accomplice to Dick Cheney, and Cheney was proven to be a liar.

Jax,

I was never arguing about who was responsible for the cost (or "blame") for the Iraq war, that was somebody else. I called out your false equivalency of "lies" associated with Desert Fox and the Iraq war. You claimed both were based on lies. I said there is a big difference between the cost of the two. That's it.

You don't read (or comprehend anyway), yet I'm the "loser"

Regarding the "clear history" about Obama spending more than Bush--what I'm saying is that the reason we are in the situation where Obama has any worry at all is because of Republican fiscal history. If we had a $2T debt in 2008 instead of $10T, we could have easily afforded stimulating ourselves out of the recession.

Yes, I place the blame for our fiscal condition at the feet of Republican trickle down economics, and I provided references.

http://zfacts.com/p/1195.html

clwyd-2621393, Houston!, SmBusOwnerinNY,

***********************VERY EVIDENT THAT YOU WERE NON PARTICIPANTS AND ARE FULL OF SH!T*****************************

Iraq:

1. President Clinton demanded US Law, H.R.4655 "Iraqis Liberation Act of 1998" Justification Section 2 WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION, Section 3 US Policy Overthrow of President Hussein with his 1998 State of the Union Address:

Together we must also confront the new hazards of chemical and biological weapons, and the outlaw states, terrorists and organized criminals seeking to acquire them. Saddam Hussein has spent the better part of this decade, and much of his nation's wealth, not on providing for the Iraqi people, but on developing nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them. The United Nations weapons inspectors have done a truly remarkable job, finding and destroying more of Iraq's arsenal than was destroyed during the entire gulf war. Now, Saddam Hussein wants to stop them from completing their mission. I know I speak for everyone in this chamber, Republicans and Democrats, when I say to Saddam Hussein, "You cannot defy the will of the world", and when I say to him, "You have used WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION before; we are determined to deny you the capacity to use them again.

2. Those of us that were on the US Military Training Teams attached to the CIA's SAD/SOG sent to US Ally Iraq during the Iran Iraq Wars (rotated to Operation Cyclone) knew that President Clinton was WRONG, in that the Chemical Weapons were used to End the years Long Iran Iraq Wars. As the Kurdistanis were the Armed men, women, children Allies of the Fundamentalist Islamic Shia Republic of Iran. We also knew that President Hussein was the Counterbalance to the Fundamentalist Islamic Shia Republic of Iran using his Iraqis Money and his Iraqis Military lives.

3. US Congress passed into US Law President Clinton's US Law, H.R.4655, "Iraqis Liberation Act of 1998" Justification Section 2 WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION, Section 3 Overthrow of President Hussein, with US Congressional Appropriations.

President Clinton's US Law H.R.4655

http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/1057063/posts

4. Just after passage of President Clinton's US Law H.R.4655, Teams of US Military Asymmetric Warfare Forces attached to the CIA's SAD/SOG went into Iraq to hire thousands of Shia Iraqis (former Iranians) as assassins and insurgents to Overthrow Sunnis President Hussein. Due to President Clinton's Gutting of the US Intelligence Agencies that were previously built up by the Director of the CIA Bush (President 41) the Teams attached to the CIA's SAD/SOG did not have local Iraqis Intelligence Assets linkups or current situational intelligence "on the ground", basically going into Iraq "in the Blind". Due to President Clinton's Gutting of the US Intelligence Agencies the funding for the local intelligence assets worldwide was lost, so most of the previous local intelligence assets to survive and earn a living became their Nation's Anti US Counter Intelligence Agents. This is why this attempt failed just like the later September 2001 CIA attempt at Afghanistan to Overthrow the Fundamentalist Islamic Taliban Government, and locate and capture Osama Bin Laden. So the hundreds of thousands of Shia Iraqis hired as assassins and insurgents were easily captured, tried and executed as Traitors by the Iraqis Intelligence, Iraqis Military, and Iraqis Law Enforcement; with President Clinton spinning this to "Dicator Massacres His Own People" (photo of Iraqis widow crying over mass graves).

5. President Clinton's US Law H.R.4655 is amended to authorize the Use of US Military Force. While still at Iraq evading the Iraqis Intelligence, Iraqis Intelligence Assets, Iraqis Military and Iraqis Law Enforcement, we are tasked with Target Damage Assessments. It was President Clinton's belief that by targeting the Iraqis Government that there would be no one left to negotiate Peace, so he ordered the targeting of the crowded Urban poor areas of Baghdad. We disagreed as you do not mess with the poor of Islam, and were not allowed to do Targeting, one of us did "mess up" and hit a Iraqis Government building as was on the spot relieved. President Clinton as Commander In Chief Fails with his 1998 Operation Desert Fox with the result of the over 1.5 Billion Islamic Believers Worldwide condeming the US as the Great Satan. We barely got out of Iraq thru Redacted alive, as even those previous Pro US Iraqis turned against the Great Satan.

Those that did get killed in action were not counted as US Military. How about you researching what happens when US Military are attached to the President's Own Executive Intelligence Agency, the CIA, and get killed in Covert Activities.

6. Due to President Clinton's Gutting of the US Intelligence Agencies, the US was left Blind and Deaf to the Events leading up to the 9/11 2001 Attacks per Bipartisan US Congressional 9/11 Commission (Committee) Investigations, Findings and Recommendations, with former President Clinton saying, "I'm a so sorry".

After the 9/11 2001 Attacks President Bush (43) sent in his Executive Intelligence Agency into Afghanistan, September 2001, as there were no longer any local Afghan US intelligence assets due to President Clinton and Afghanistan was locked down tighter than North Korea by the Fundamentalist Islamic Taliban Government. Their mission was to Overthrow the Fundamentalist Islamic Taliban Government, Locate and Capture Osama Bin Laden, with both missions failing due to lack of local Afghan intelligence assets.

7. In October 2001 we attached to the CIA's SAD/SOG go into Afghanistan to Overthrow the Fundamentalist Islamic Taliban Government, eliminate Al Quada, and Islamic Jihadist Training Camps. Those of us that were previously involved with Operation Cyclone knew that the near Arctic Afghan Winter was coming.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=arxKhJIjIiY

After the Overthrow of the Fundamentalist Islamic Taliban Government we chased them, Al Quada, and the Islamic Jihadists to Northern Iraq thru the Old Silk Road. Some also fled to Pakistan.

8. In 2001 we with the attached US Army 10th Special Forces Group as 2001 Operation Viking Hammer go into Northern Iraq to eliminate the Fundamentalist Islamic Taliban, Al Quada, Islamic Jihadists that escaped us from Afghanistan. They had combined together with the Fundamentalist Islamic Kurdistanis PKK, HPG, KGK and called themselves Ansar Al Islam. Before we can eliminate Ansar Al Islam the Fundamentalist Islamic Shia Republic of Iran gave them Islamic Sanctuary.

Since Afghanistan was a United Nations Mission, NATO f**ked up and appointed Gentleman British General McColl as the Commander ISAF with no idea of Asymmetric War Afghanistan, so he did nothing to stop the Taliban, Al Quada, Islamic Jihadists from returning to Afghanistan thru Iran or from Pakistan.

9. While still at Northern Iraq our mission is changed to Operation Hotel California as the preparation of Iraq for the US Military Overthrow of President Hussein in accordance with the US Policy of President Clinton's US Law, H.R.4655 Section 3. Our primary Mission is to create a Strategic Operational Feint to get the Iraqis Military Command and Iraqis Political Leadership to deploy their Main Iraqis Military Forces North.

We, attacked, seized and secured the Iraqis Chemical Weapons Facility at Sargat Iraq. Then with Pro US Kurdistanis attacked, seized and secured the Northern Iraqis Oil Fields. In Company sized units we attacked and destroyed five Iraqis Full Strength Armored and Mechanized Infantry Divisions without air support*. This caused the Iraqis Military Command to deploy over ten Full Strength Iraqis Divisions North of Baghdad away from southern Iraq.

*Credited to the US Army 10th Special Forces Group, Official Unclassified History.

10. US E-Bombs were used to destroy all Iraqis Electronics, this plunged 20th Century Iraqis into the Stone Ages. So that the Iraqis Military nor Government could form a cohesive coordinated defense of Iraq. As we knew the Iraqis Military was Command Driven, Orders Only, without Orders they would do nothing, so the over ten Iraqis Divisions deployed North of Baghdad because of us could not be redeployed to the South to meet the 2003 US Military Forces coming from Kuwait and Saudi Arabia.

Will Saddam Fall Victim to the Elusive E-bomb?

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=125336&page=1

11. We start LRS-D and Pathfinder Operations at Iraq. President Clinton's US Law, H.R. 4655 "Iraqis Liberation Act of 1998" becomes 2003 Operation Iraqis Freedom.

12. We are attached to the Joint Special Operations Task Force Iraq to locate and capture President Hussein.

13. After all of the above we (survivors) are finally allowed R&R and Leaves to attend many memorial services, assess new to the Teams, train the Teams with the new team members, train for our next mission(s).

14. In 2006 President Bush (43) Amended the US No Assassination Policy to Pre Presidential Authorize the Termination of Osama Bin Laden as the Mission FAILURE of locating and capturing Osama Bin Laden to gain his mission planning, thought processes as imprinted on his Al Quada Leadership, to allow the US to preemptively interdict all Al Quada Activities Worldwide. The 2001 Mission to Locate and Capture Osama Bin Laden was Pre Presidential Authorized by President Bush (43) as delegated to the Director of the CIA (further delegated to his CIA's SAD/SOG), Commander US Military Special Operations Command, Commander US Miltary Joint Special Operations Command.

You want to discuss President Obama as Commander In Chief Illegally Ordering the US Military to attack US Ally President Gaddaffi, as a Violation of US Law that Restricts and Limits the Presidential War Powers, 1973 War Powers Resolution (Act). And how "Unfunded" ,"Not Funded" Libya was. Also you will not find out just how many US Military "Boots on the Ground" attached to the CIA's SAD/SOG died in Combat (Killed In Action). Hint: For how long (start and end dates) was LTC Wood's US Army Special Forces Specialized Support Teams at Libya. And that is the only Teams you know about.

In 2014, look to see that change to the gop being in the minor league again.

Knocking the President is purely a republican ploy to divert attention from their lack of doing anything. He gave them a plan and they have no plan yet they keep saying that they have no plan from the President.

He laid it out pretty clear yesterday in his short report on their meeting.

We are still dealing with the same congress. The newly elected don't take office until after Jan.1st. BTW the republicans got clobbered in the 2012 election.

And the house have something like 11 passed bills (and more then one are budgets and plans to help fix this mess of a Gov.) in the senate that the Dems won't even put up for a vote, When a leader will not give an inch on a negotiation isn't the negotiations over seems to me the Dems will not budge on cuts and if the Reps are smart they will not budge on a tax break unless it is for all Americans.

Jim,

The Republicans are NOT the "Duly Elected majority representing the voice of the people who elected them."

You obviously either did not watch the election or the results of the voting which followed the election. Or you are one of those Republicans who create your own facts in you own mind, ignoring what happens in the REAL world.

The Democrats got more votes in EVERY race, INCLUDING the House of Representatives. The Republicans only retained the majority in the House due to Gerrymandering. Look it up....

In 2014, look to see that change to the gop being in the minor league again.

Won't that be great, huh? It'll be just like 2008-2010 when the dems had the White house, the senate and the house of reps. Just look how much they got done!

....oh, wait.....

and we spent more than we took in for 8+ years

There is the problem. Bush spent more on 2 unnecessary wars and Medicaid on a credit card and gave massive tax cuts at the same time.

Timo1, seek professional mental help. Another pseudo Xtian talibangelist. Paranoia is a beatch....

Yo tats...love the name calling...try educating yourself...

I do not have a soultion, political or other, to the fiscal problems we face.

The facts are simply this. Our government collects about 2.5 Trillion in income taxes. (Last years number) We are presently 16.4 Trillion in debt and climbing. Simple divisional math suggests that without interest, it would take all of us surrendering any and all refunds for the next 6.5 years and also not spending a dime and we still would be lacking.

Staggering.

Left & Right need to meet in the middle and unfortunately, we are only going to get a band-aid instead of an overhaul.

Tim01- YOU are exactly what is wrong with this country. I have watched this attitude destroy our country. I'll bet you voted for Reagan too. The Republicans were too busy voting on restricting women reproductive rights to be concerned about the rest of the business that needs to be done. You know, people who don't believe in government should not be elected. Nothing gets done with that attitude. Why the American populace continues to vote against their own best interests is a mystery to me. Why are the Republicans allowed to gerrymander districts to insure a majority is the main part of the problem.

Tim01,

Please seek help and stop drinking the Drain-o.

As for your question about "should we raise taxes or cut spending?" Well, common sense says that BOTH are the way to fix the problem.

For you Teapublicans who cannot or will not attempt to understand the reason for raising taxes on the rich, here is the reasoning:

The middle class has been paying the heavy tax burden for this country, while the wealthy have been getting the big tax breaks. These tax breaks have been used by the wealthy, not to create jobs, but to create MORE WEALTH for the already rich people. If those tax breaks created more jobs, there should not be as much unemployment as we have, so it obviously has NOT worked. A tax hike on the wealthy people, alone, would not cure the economy, but WOULD be the fair and right thing to do. EVERYONE needs to do their FAIR share......

Left & Right need to meet in the middle and unfortunately, we are only going to get a band-aid instead of an overhaul.

Agree shifix- but that's about as likely to happen as the people on this board are to stop name calling and playing the finger pointing my side is better then your side crap we see day after day.

What do you consider "fair" Randy? Do we all pay the same percentage across the board, or do the very rich pay a lot more while us not so very rich pay very little? What exactly is "fair"

I agree with Randy. I feel the wealthy should be taxed more heavely and leave the middle class alone. The middle class people have paid more taxes over the years than the wealthy.......its time the wealthy to pay up!!

We need a "new" congress! I also believe that the high officials ahould have to pay for their own insurance plans and have their benefits cut!

"Timo1

Yo tats...love the name calling...try educating yourself..."

"you silly democrats are like 4 year old brats"

How about you try practicing what you preach?

"What do you consider "fair" Randy? Do we all pay the same percentage across the board, or do the very rich pay a lot more while us not so very rich pay very little? What exactly is "fair""

fair is doing it the way it was meant to be done. The rich pay a bigger % than the poor or middle class. It isn't that way any longer.

The "Professional Politician

The "Professional Politician" has forgotten who they
work for...the American people! Perhaps they need a reminder!

Republicans are not addressing the will of the people, only
forcing their own ideals on the majority of us, it time for some of them to go!

The care for nothing but their selves they should all be fired.

Retire the whole lot of Republicans
on the hill, remove their benefits of retirement, give them Social Sec. Like
the rest of us.

They forget who they work for; I pay their salary and expect
them to get the job done. They have become self centered egotists; they stink

No agreement No paycheck. Go to a performance pay plan.

We citizens should take away all legislators' pensions & medical insurance if they don't settle this by Dec. 31st & watch how fast they act.

If Congress won't reach a decision they should all be removed
from office and replaced with Americans who really care about our country.

Congress cares only about their paychecks and their healthcare. Strip them of their pay, houses and benefits and make them all equal with us.

Paying people for work not done is not the American Way!

I think it is time for term limits, limited benefits, and only social security and Obamacare for all our elected officials. It might be the wakeup call they need to remind them they represent the folks in their jurisdiction and not themelves. All the politicians seem to get intrenched after a few years and can only look after their own welfare. The people they represent seem to take a back seat.

Everybody complains, but I see the same politicians, including my State, being re-elected time after time. The people who vote keep the same politicians in office and keep expecting different results. Wake up!!!

Perhaps it is time to review the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence.